I sure do appreciate how we will never have to wonder about Ted Cruz and porn. Yup I sure do appreciate that. It's all we have left: the absence of Ted Cruz porn weirdness.

Think I'll check my morning twitter feed now.

Author:

McParadigm [ Tue September 12, 2017 12:40 pm ]

Post subject:

Re: Not worthy of a thread News

oh god

Author:

Simple Torture [ Tue September 12, 2017 1:03 pm ]

Post subject:

Re: Not worthy of a thread News

Author:

Simple Torture [ Tue September 12, 2017 1:09 pm ]

Post subject:

Re: Not worthy of a thread News

I'm shocked I haven't seen "layin' Ted" in any headlines this morning.

Author:

McParadigm [ Tue September 12, 2017 1:22 pm ]

Post subject:

Re: Not worthy of a thread News

Author:

The Argonaut [ Tue September 12, 2017 2:11 pm ]

Post subject:

Re: Not worthy of a thread News

McParadigm wrote:

oh so wonderful

Author:

Monkey_Driven [ Tue September 12, 2017 3:05 pm ]

Post subject:

Re: Not worthy of a thread News

simple schoolboy wrote:

Green Habit wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:

I think I speak for everyone on RM when I say "Great news!"

Not me.

simple schoolboy wrote:

The coverage on this was great. On NPR, some apologist for the "Dear Colleague" letter was trying to make a case for offenses less serious than crimes being dealt with at the school level, and that apologetic sexual offenders might be subject to some minor re-education courses.

Has that happened at all under this guidance? Is any sanction other than kicking a 'guilty' offender off campus appropriate, based on the guidelines?

I tried to google words like "suspend", "expel", or "expulsion" and came up empty. It's pretty nondescript on what disciplinary action should be taken against the offender. And I think that's fine: there should be room for mitigating factors as appropriate, but I also wouldn't take expulsion off the table altogether.

simple schoolboy wrote:

Its almost as if they want to impose employment style "sexual harassment" law on sexual partners, and demanding enthusiastic consent. Its totally unworkable.

Most of the complaints stem from the insistence on using the preponderance of the evidence standard in these cases. But I don't see why that's unreasonable. This doesn't deal with throwing the offenders in jail, or even seeking civil remedies. At worst, it's kicking offenders off a campus in which they've been deemed to make life a living hell for at least one person among the campus population. That shouldn't mean that the offender can't pursue higher education at a different school, but does mean that their presence at the school where this happened has become so toxic that their continued presence is harming the student population as a whole.

Preponderance of evidence is one of the lesser issues. There is no due process. The normal Title IX type hearing entails getting notice a few days before a hearing, and receiving no indication of what the accusations are before the hearing. Generally, the accused is barred from bringing a lawyer, or anyone allowed to advocate on their behalf. The accused is not allowed to introduce evidence, or at least the investigator is not required to accept any submissions.

Its wholly one sided, and completely unfair. This also goes beyond alleged sexual misconduct. Professors have had complaints filed against them for writing papers that are insufficiently pro rape hysteria.

If being kicked off campus is an un-serious punishment, then it seems totally inappropriate for this to be the sanction that rapists get.

I can't speak to every campus, but this is not true here. I have served as a panelist for our Title IX Resolution Team for the past two years and have heard seven cases. The timeline for reporting/resolving a Title IX complaint is below:

-Complainant or Third Party reports the violation to the Title IX office. -Title IX investigates the complaint and decides to further pursue the case or just to document it.-If the Title IX feels like there is enough of a case they will contact the Complainant to see if they would like to pursue it further. Complainant can decline or proceed.-If the case continues the respondent (accused) is notified.-Both the complainant and respondent are invited to meet with the Title IX office to tell their side of the story. They can provide evidence at this time. They can meet with the Title IX office multiple times if desired.-The complainant can then choose to bring the case before a panel. If a hearing/panel option is chosen both parties work with the Title IX office to schedule a time/location. Both parties are notified of the time/location.-Both parties can submit additional evidence/witnesses at any point from the initial contact with the Title IX office all the way up to the hearing/panel.-The panel hears the case based upon the evidence and testimony of both parties. Each party can bring one advocate to sit in on the panel with them. The advocate serves as an advisor, but not allowed to really talk to the panel. The complainant and respondent can speak to the panel and/or explain issues. This is not a court of law.-The panel makes a verdict based on the evidence at hand using preponderance or evidence. They then decide upon a punishment or drop the case. They can determine if a respondent violated multiple sections of Title IX or campus policy, just one or two, or none at all. -The decision of the Panel is given to both parties.-The respondent has the right to appeal the decision.

Some other notes on the process:-The decision is not reported to the National Student Clearinghouse. If a student is expelled they can transfer to another institution. That institution would need to contact the original institution to inquire about the student's previous conduct.-This is not a court of law and is separate from any criminal case that may be involved. The panel is not a judge or jury. They are trying the case to see if the student violated Title IX or another campus policy. Decisions are often made considering the safety of other students on campus.-Panelists do not take their role lightly. If a case makes it all the way to the Hearing/Panel process there is usually, but certainly not always, some sort of violation that occurred. The Title IX office receives reported violations daily, but only a fraction make it to the Hearing process.-Punishments can vary between minor suspensions to expulsion.

When accepting this role I too was skeptical of the process, thinking it was biased towards the complainant. But, after serving on panels involving allegations of sexual assault, stalking, harassment, and rape I believe it is a fair process for universities to use. Some of it can be improved, but it is certainly light years better than anything existed prior.

Author:

bune [ Tue September 12, 2017 3:27 pm ]

Post subject:

Re: Not worthy of a thread News

McParadigm wrote:

I sure do appreciate how we will never have to wonder about Ted Cruz and porn. Yup I sure do appreciate that. It's all we have left: the absence of Ted Cruz porn weirdness.

Think I'll check my morning twitter feed now.

I read that the video he liked it a person who mainly does incest pron. And he had this interaction with his daughter if you recall:

Author:

McParadigm [ Tue September 12, 2017 3:28 pm ]

Post subject:

Re: Not worthy of a thread News

By "I read that..." do you mean that you recognized the video, too?

Author:

bune [ Tue September 12, 2017 4:30 pm ]

Post subject:

Re: Not worthy of a thread News

In this case no, it was an actual "I read that".

Author:

McParadigm [ Wed September 13, 2017 1:35 am ]

Post subject:

Re: Not worthy of a thread News

Uh, it was a staffer.

A better reaction would have been to make a solemn statement, in video, and say something like "My fellow Americans, last night my penis went down with all hands on board."

Author:

BurtReynolds [ Wed September 13, 2017 6:30 am ]

Post subject:

Re: Not worthy of a thread News

Its all incest porn these days. I blame Game of Thrones.

In related news, an actual kiddie fucker had to resign as mayor of Seattle today.